• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

2012 Debates

Here's a good question for candidates: "It's November 8th and you've lost the election. Why do think you lost?"
It is a good question and it's been asked a lot. The answer is usually a derivation of "I wasn't able to get my message across".

Politicians never have the wrong message, it's always that they weren't able to get it through the thick skulls of the voters.
 
I've been really busy at work all morning and I'm just checking in now. Did Romney really say that, or is this some kind of joke?

I've been told that he said this:

Here's his full answer from the transcript for full context:
CROWLEY: Governor Romney, pay equity for women?

ROMNEY: Thank you. And important topic, and one which I learned a great deal about, particularly as I was serving as governor of my state, because I had the chance to pull together a cabinet and all the applicants seemed to be men.

And I - and I went to my staff, and I said, "How come all the people for these jobs are - are all men." They said, "Well, these are the people that have the qualifications." And I said, "Well, gosh, can't we - can't we find some - some women that are also qualified?"

And - and so we - we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet.

I went to a number of women's groups and said, "Can you help us find folks," and they brought us whole binders full of women.

I was proud of the fact that after I staffed my Cabinet and my senior staff, that the University of New York in Albany did a survey of all 50 states, and concluded that mine had more women in senior leadership positions than any other state in America.

Now one of the reasons I was able to get so many good women to be part of that team was because of our recruiting effort. But number two, because I recognized that if you're going to have women in the workforce that sometimes you need to be more flexible. My chief of staff, for instance, had two kids that were still in school.

She said, I can't be here until 7 or 8 o'clock at night. I need to be able to get home at 5 o'clock so I can be there for making dinner for my kids and being with them when they get home from school. So we said fine. Let's have a flexible schedule so you can have hours that work for you.

We're going to have to have employers in the new economy, in the economy I'm going to bring to play, that are going to be so anxious to get good workers they're going to be anxious to hire women. In the - in the last women have lost 580,000 jobs. That's the net of what's happened in the last four years. We're still down 580,000 jobs. I mentioned 31/2 million women, more now in poverty than four years ago.

What we can do to help young women and women of all ages is to have a strong economy, so strong that employers that are looking to find good employees and bringing them into their workforce and adapting to a flexible work schedule that gives women opportunities that they would otherwise not be able to afford.

This is what I have done. It's what I look forward to doing and I know what it takes to make an economy work, and I know what a working economy looks like. And an economy with 7.8 percent unemployment is not a real strong economy. An economy that has 23 million people looking for work is not a strong economy.

An economy with 50 percent of kids graduating from college that can't finds a job, or a college level job, that's not what we have to have. CROWLEY: Governor?

ROMNEY: I'm going to help women in America get good work by getting a stronger economy and by supporting women in the workforce.

Nothing in his response specifically about pay equity for women. Flexible hours is a different subject. There's an assumption that women need more flexible hours than men because they have more domestic demands on their time than men. I'll leave it to women to decide if that's a satisfactory answer.
 
Did not like the moderation this round, or the lack thereof, more precisely. They need JREF Mods :D !

I took the most exception to Romney's anti-China statements. Wasn't he the one that said we shouldn't be starting a trade war with them, or was that someone else from the Republican primary?

Obama at least mentioned that there were jobs that weren't coming back.

Romney says that he supports job training, but I work in a job training center and everyone knows that Republican victory will mean more cuts.

Also there was the answer about making more people marry in response to gun violence. Those statistics must feel molested.
 
Last edited:
He (Obama) did better than I expected.

I agree. I have said before, Obama isn't really a good debater, that's not his arena. I think he might have had about the best debate of his career tonight and he was a lot better than I thought he could be frankly.

He still wasn't AMAZING. I think he hit Romney HARD on the Rose Garden stuff, the woman's rights issues and 47% comments but all in all he was just better than Romney but not by LIGHT years... which at the end of the day is probably all Obama needed to do at this point.
 
I'm waiting for Romney apologists to begin claiming that Obama's "no acts of terror" quote from the rose garden really meant that there were "no acts of terror.":D

Obama's factual superiority on several areas and Romney's being rattled gives Obama the win for me. Not huge, but a win. Once Romney is fact checked in his Gish gallops, it may be even more of an Obama victory. Romney's credibility for me is so low I can't really be very objective.
 
Last edited:
As an oil company guy, I have to say Obama smoked Romney on one point. Romney tried to claim Obama had cut oil leases, and Obama explained quite directly that he had cut back on the practice of oil companies sitting on leases until they felt good and ready to drill. Well, that is true. Oil companies are constantly trying to hold their leases with minor activities that sort-of satisfy the idea that they are getting ready to drill. That's how they cut leasing costs. But it's a dodge, and I don't think anybody in our company could honestly claim that it isn't.

Obama destroyed Romney's point and replaced it with a reasonable and true scenario. But most people won't realize that, so it's probably not going to be a big issue.
That is the way I saw it too. Obama dominated that point, and was able to show Mitt's tired talking points for what they were. Glad to see one of the white collar roughnecks seeing it the same way too.

Daredelvis
 
When are the conservatives going realize that the Libya issue is not a winning issue for them?

I hope you are right, but I fear you are wrong. Tonight, Obama won a battle, but I think Romney will win the war.

In the days following the attack, I had an impression that there was an angry Islamic mob in Benghazi complaining about a video, and that it got so out of hand that the ambassador was killed.

I would have to go back and see if my impressions came from the news media alone, but I think that they came from administration officials, and President Obama himself, referring to the film multiple times as if it were relevant.

Romney got hung up on the words tonight, and the president tripped him up, with the help of the moderator, but, frankly, the whole episode has made the administration look inept.

This isn't over. Next week's debate is on foreign policy, and this issue will no doubt loom large. Both men had better be preparing a good response, but the stakes are much higher for the president.
 
When are the conservatives going realize that the Libya issue is not a winning issue for them?

I fail to see how the party of cutting embassy security by $300 million and ignoring the "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" memo has any standing on this issue.

Daredelvis
 
I'm waiting for Romney apologists to begin claiming that Obama's "no acts of terror" quote from the rose garden really meant that there were "no acts of terror.":D

They seem to be sticking with the "moderator was bias!!" talking point at the moment. I guess correcting lies, like Romney's statement concerning Libya, is a sign of bias. :boggled:
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry, but one particular "fact" that Romney keeps citing, is that gasoline prices have doubled under Obama's Presidency....

If your own memory doesnt serve well enough to answer this charge, there are numerous websites that track the average price of gasoline going back many years.

The price of gasoline during 2007 and 2008, went through the roof, including prices near or past where they are right now. The fact that they dropped back to more reasonable prices in the months leading up to the 2008 election makes one question why exactly that happened. Was it because of the recession as Obama stated, or from pressure from politicians on oil companies to lower the prices, so that the people in power (GOP) could claim a success, or that they were concerned about the consumer as opposed to their mega-rich pals running the oil industry?

Either way, to keep asserting that the high gas prices are somehow Obama's fault, is factually dishonest, and I keep hoping that Obama will just come out and say so.

-TS-
 
I hope you are right, but I fear you are wrong. Tonight, Obama won a battle, but I think Romney will win the war.

In the days following the attack, I had an impression that there was an angry Islamic mob in Benghazi complaining about a video, and that it got so out of hand that the ambassador was killed.

I would have to go back and see if my impressions came from the news media alone, but I think that they came from administration officials, and President Obama himself, referring to the film multiple times as if it were relevant.

Romney got hung up on the words tonight, and the president tripped him up, with the help of the moderator, but, frankly, the whole episode has made the administration look inept.

This isn't over. Next week's debate is on foreign policy, and this issue will no doubt loom large. Both men had better be preparing a good response, but the stakes are much higher for the president.


D'oh! I thought foreign policy was tonight! No wonder I still have stacks of undrunk drink.
 
"Because both you and Bush are Republicans, I'm afraid of a return to those policies"

This, right here, is what's plaguing America. People who think that all Republicans (or all Democrats, for that matter) are exactly the same. "Oh, he has an 'R' next to his name! He must be da evilests!!"

If the Senate Republicans hadn't just spent the last few years voting in lockstep to block everything that Obama favored, you might have a point.

When are the conservatives going realize that the Libya issue is not a winning issue for them?

Romney said that if he had a Carter/Hostage type situation he would try to exploit it. That's what he's been trying to do.
 

Back
Top Bottom